Harris vs. Hauritz vs. Swann

Given that spin stocks worldwide aren't what they used to be, I have to say that these three spinners are doing a more than decent job of being part strike part support for the team's main pacers. I was wondering what you guys felt the current pecking order would be of the three. I'm leaning towards Swann as the best, as his finest spells are closest to worldclass IMO though he is not as consistent. Thoughts?

Given that spin stocks worldwide aren't what they used to be, I have to say that these three spinners are doing a more than decent job of being part strike part support for the team's main pacers. I was wondering what you guys felt the current pecking order would be of the three. I'm leaning towards Swann as the best, as his finest spells are closest to worldclass IMO though he is not as consistent. Thoughts?

From the little I've seen of the 3, damn hard to separate. Probably Swann marginally.

Swann the best all-round spinner. Harris & Hauritz are a joke & too often have been made to look good by teams who play spin weak i.e my beloved England.

Harris in the last 3 years for SA has worked very well in a 5-man attack. So as long as SA have that
5-man attack he will be very useful in tests although he is a joke spinner. If Kallis stops bowling, i dont think Harris will be that effective in a 4-man attack.

Hauritz i still think he is joke - but he no doubt has improved a great deal in 2009 & is the most accurate/economical of the three. But as i've maintained AUS currently can do without playing him in most conditions. Their strenght is the pace attack & should play 4-seamers.

Swann is very solid in most conditions. He is the most likely of the three to get good batsman out consistently with good bowling - instead of batsman doing like Pietersen & getting themselves out due to false strokes/stupid shots. ENG can ATM can easily play him a 4-man attack wtihout much worries (although there will be conditions when ENG may consider dropping him for a 4-man pace attack as well).

Only problem is that with an average/decent pace trio of Anderson/Onions/Broad without Flintoff these days . If one of those guys has an off-days & Swann has to take up extra-responsibility (like a Warne in the 05 Ashes) he can be exposed due to a lack or raw wicket-taking weapons (i.e a doosra).

Swann the best all-round spinner. Harris & Hauritz are a joke & too often have been made to look good by teams who play spin weak i.e my beloved England.

Harris in the last 3 years for SA has worked very well in a 5-man attack. So as long as SA have that
5-man attack he will be very useful in tests although he is a joke spinner. If Kallis stops bowling, i dont think Harris will be that effective in a 4-man attack.

Hauritz i still think he is joke - but he no doubt has improved a great deal in 2009 & is the most accurate/economical of the three. But as i've maintained AUS currently can do without playing him in most conditions. Their strenght is the pace attack & should play 4-seamers.

Swann is very solid in most conditions. He is the most likely of the three to get good batsman out consistently with good bowling - instead of batsman doing like Pietersen & getting themselves out due to false strokes/stupid shots. ENG can ATM can easily play him a 4-man attack wtihout much worries (although there will be conditions when ENG may consider dropping him for a 4-man pace attack as well).

Only problem is that with an average/decent pace trio of Anderson/Onions/Broad without Flintoff these days . If one of those guys has an off-days & Swann has to take up extra-responsibility (like a Warne in the 05 Ashes) he can be exposed due to a lack or raw wicket-taking weapons (i.e a doosra).

Swann the best all-round spinner. Harris & Hauritz are a joke & too often have been made to look good by teams who play spin weak i.e my beloved England.

Harris in the last 3 years for SA has worked very well in a 5-man attack. So as long as SA have that
5-man attack he will be very useful in tests although he is a joke spinner. If Kallis stops bowling, i dont think Harris will be that effective in a 4-man attack.

Hauritz i still think he is joke - but he no doubt has improved a great deal in 2009 & is the most accurate/economical of the three. But as i've maintained AUS currently can do without playing him in most conditions. Their strenght is the pace attack & should play 4-seamers.

Swann is very solid in most conditions. He is the most likely of the three to get good batsman out consistently with good bowling - instead of batsman doing like Pietersen & getting themselves out due to false strokes/stupid shots. ENG can ATM can easily play him a 4-man attack wtihout much worries (although there will be conditions when ENG may consider dropping him for a 4-man pace attack as well).

Only problem is that with an average/decent pace trio of Anderson/Onions/Broad without Flintoff these days . If one of those guys has an off-days & Swann has to take up extra-responsibility (like a Warne in the 05 Ashes) he can be exposed due to a lack or raw wicket-taking weapons (i.e a doosra).

Harris has better accuracy than Swann but Swann has better attacking tools. Thus on a turning pitch Harris should be useful, Swann should be deadly. On a non-turner Harris and Swann are still capable of baiting batsmen out but I do think there've been a few more batsmen to fall for said trap than should be doing.

Hauritz has yet to show that he can be a terribly good bowler even on a turning deck.

Hauritz is capable of bowling beautifully, a really nice classical offspinner. Not a world-beater but a bit underrated imho.

Harris looks so entirely unthreatening, but that is his secret weapon. That and the toxic mind-waves that he emits to lure batsmen into crazy errors against his bowling.

Admittedly it's not saying much, but Swann is by a distance the best English spinner I've seen for a while. He can sometimes get a fair amount of turn, but has a very good delivery that goes straight on (occasionally with a bit of arm-ball swing) and his record against lefties is outstanding.

Admittedly it's not saying much, but Swann is by a distance the best English spinner I've seen for a while.

People were saying that about MSP barely a couple of years ago. I don't doubt Swann is a bit better than Giles and certainly far, far more reliable than Tufnell (I'd still imagine Tufnell's best bowling on the exceptionally rare occasion he produced it is better than anything Swann can produce but he's got time to show otherwise yet) but I seriously dispute he's significantly if at all better Croft and even the county-spectator's favourite Such. He is currently better than MSP but I do still think MSP could potentially outdo him in the long-run, though that's looking less likely as time goes on.

I've never yet been truly familiar with how good or otherwise the Embureys and Edmundses were (obviously they didn't have the uncovered wickets advantage that their predecessors Illingworth and Underwood enjoyed for the first part of their careers) so I'll gladly not currently try to compare there, but I realise you may be calling Swann the best since Emburey so it may not be important anyway.